Thursday, July 7, 2011
Thursday, June 30, 2011
A NATION OF BLIND, SHORTSIGHTED, INCOMPETENT FOOLS
To my readers: A fellow facebook friend and patriot posted this and with her permission I wanted to pass it on as I couldn't have said it better.
So, my fellow Christian Conservative Patriots, our elected officials have sold us out. They have taken our tax dollars, and used them for selfish and immoral purposes. They've given money to our enemies for years. They invite our enemies to come live amongst us, and give them free government handouts from our hard-earned wages. And those same thieves are now voting against us in all important matters of life, including our rights to freedom of religion. Immorality is at an alarming low, and getting worse daily. We're losing our jobs, homes, and savings due to the very policies they put in place, yet they refuse to change course, or do what's right for America. We stupidly keep electing the same immoral, criminal people to rule over us.
Congress and our courts refuse to address the issue of Obama's eligibility. Why? What is their payoff? I am done with our corrupt politicians. They won't get a single penny from me, or my vote again, because I don't see them impeaching the illegal terrorist usurper in the White House, prosecuting those gunrunning at the ATF, closing our borders, etc. In general, I don't see our legislators doing what is right for us.
Complaining won't change things. They aren't listening and don't care. They have guaranteed pensions and healthcare, while they steal, and ruin ours. That we haven't stopped them, or changed the regime, removed them from office is quite troubling to me. That we lose more freedoms everyday is terrifying. That we haven't shut down the propaganda machines called public broadcasting, is disheartening.
The knowledge that my fellow Americans allow their children to continue attending the public indoctrination centers for their "education," and continue allowing those precious children to be spoonfed Communist, Humanistic, false science garbage, while promoting false religions, and denying freedom of the Christian religion, to me is appalling.
Knowing that few attend city council or township meetings, barely know those whom they are electing to reign over them is inconceivable. My fellow Americans have put their own very lives into the hands of a corrupt, immoral group of Globalist "elites," who are trying to dictate every aspect of our lives, from the foods we eat, to what we can do in our homes and businesses, and the list goes on... That so few fight the creeping Communism/Socialism/Marxism/Pr
Can anyone tell me how Obama is still in office? Why is Soros not in prison for war crimes, and allowed to continue destroying nations? Why aren't we fighting the Federal Reserve's raping of America? Why does our Federal Government refuse to secure our borders? And why are we doing nothing to stop this madness? We have become a nation of blind, shortsighted, incompetent fools. I am losing faith in my fellow Americans.
H/T Anne Phelps - Facebook group: Standup Speak out https://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_182181545149120&id=221917807842160¬if_t=group_activity
So, my fellow Christian Conservative Patriots, our elected officials have sold us out. They have taken our tax dollars, and used them for selfish and immoral purposes. They've given money to our enemies for years. They invite our enemies to come live amongst us, and give them free government handouts from our hard-earned wages. And those same thieves are now voting against us in all important matters of life, including our rights to freedom of religion. Immorality is at an alarming low, and getting worse daily. We're losing our jobs, homes, and savings due to the very policies they put in place, yet they refuse to change course, or do what's right for America. We stupidly keep electing the same immoral, criminal people to rule over us.
Congress and our courts refuse to address the issue of Obama's eligibility. Why? What is their payoff? I am done with our corrupt politicians. They won't get a single penny from me, or my vote again, because I don't see them impeaching the illegal terrorist usurper in the White House, prosecuting those gunrunning at the ATF, closing our borders, etc. In general, I don't see our legislators doing what is right for us.
Complaining won't change things. They aren't listening and don't care. They have guaranteed pensions and healthcare, while they steal, and ruin ours. That we haven't stopped them, or changed the regime, removed them from office is quite troubling to me. That we lose more freedoms everyday is terrifying. That we haven't shut down the propaganda machines called public broadcasting, is disheartening.
The knowledge that my fellow Americans allow their children to continue attending the public indoctrination centers for their "education," and continue allowing those precious children to be spoonfed Communist, Humanistic, false science garbage, while promoting false religions, and denying freedom of the Christian religion, to me is appalling.
Knowing that few attend city council or township meetings, barely know those whom they are electing to reign over them is inconceivable. My fellow Americans have put their own very lives into the hands of a corrupt, immoral group of Globalist "elites," who are trying to dictate every aspect of our lives, from the foods we eat, to what we can do in our homes and businesses, and the list goes on... That so few fight the creeping Communism/Socialism/Marxism/Pr
Can anyone tell me how Obama is still in office? Why is Soros not in prison for war crimes, and allowed to continue destroying nations? Why aren't we fighting the Federal Reserve's raping of America? Why does our Federal Government refuse to secure our borders? And why are we doing nothing to stop this madness? We have become a nation of blind, shortsighted, incompetent fools. I am losing faith in my fellow Americans.
H/T Anne Phelps - Facebook group: Standup Speak out https://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_182181545149120&id=221917807842160¬if_t=group_activity
Sunday, May 15, 2011
HERMAN CAIN ON C-SPAN ROAD TO THE WHITE HOUSE 2012
This is a 45 minute interview, so sit back, relax and listen.
Monday, May 9, 2011
WIKILEAKS EXPOSES NORTH AMERICAN INTEGRATION PLOT
As early as January of 2005, high-ranking officials were discussing the best way to sell the idea of North American “integration” to the public and policymakers while getting around national constitutions. The prospect of creating a monetary unit to replace national currencies was a hot topic as well.
Some details of the schemes were exposed in a secret 2005 U.S. embassy cable from Ottawa signed by then-Ambassador Paul Cellucci. The document was released by WikiLeaks on April 28. But so far, it has barely attracted any attention in the United States, Canada, or Mexico beyond a few mentions in some liberty-minded Internet forums.
Numerous topics are discussed in the leaked document — borders, currency, labor, regulation, and more. How to push the integration agenda features particularly prominently.
Under the subject line “Placing a new North American Initiative in its economic policy context,” American diplomatic personnel in Canada said they believed an “incremental” path toward North American integration would probably gain the most support from policymakers. Apparently Canadian economists agreed.
The cable also touts the supposed benefits of merging the three countries and even mentions what elements to “stress” in future “efforts to promote further integration.” It lists what it claims is a summary of the “consensus” among Canadian economists about the issues, too.
Merging the United States, Canada, and Mexico
Integration is a little-used term employed mainly by policy wonks. But while it may sound relatively harmless, it generally describes a very serious phenomenon when used in a geopolitical context — the gradual merging of separate countries under a regional authority.
Similar processes are already well underway in Europe, Africa, and South America. And according to critics, the results — essentially abolishing national sovereignty in favor of supranational, unaccountable governance — have been an unmitigated disaster. But the U.S. government doesn’t think so.
In North America, integration has been proceeding rapidly for years. The New American magazine was among the first to report on the efforts to erect what critics have called a “North American Union,” encompassing Canada, the United States, and Mexico. But more recently, the topic has received more attention.
After the creation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) — similar in many ways to the European Common Market that preceded the political union in Europe — the integration scheme has only accelerated. And the bipartisan efforts have been going on for years.
Under President George W. Bush, integration occurred through the little-known “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.” And with the Obama administration, the process, now virtually out in the open, is only accelerating.
Back in 2005, the cable released recently by WikiLeaks explained how it would be done. And looking back, the document was right on the mark.
Moving Forward
The best way forward, according to the cable, is via gradual steps. “An incremental and pragmatic package of tasks for a new North American Initiative (NAI) will likely gain the most support among Canadian policymakers,” the cable states in its summary.
“Our research leads us to conclude that such a package should tackle both ‘security’ and ‘prosperity’ goals,” the document claims, using the two key words that have been emphasized at every step along the way. “This fits the recommendations of Canadian economists who have assessed the options for continental integration.”
Toward the end, the cable offers more advice on how to advance the integration agenda by tailoring the narrative. “When advocating [the North American Initiative to integrate the three countries], it would be better to highlight specific gains to individual firms, industries or travelers, and especially consumers,” the cable states, noting that it’s harder to “estimate the benefits” on a national or continental scale.
Unsubstantiated Claims
In a section headlined “North American Integration: What We Know,” the cable offers nothing but praise for the merging of the continent’s once-sovereign nations that had already been achieved.
“Past integration (not just NAFTA but also many bilateral and unilateral steps) has increased trade, economic growth, and productivity,” it claims, despite the fact that countless economists disagree. Of course, true free-trade advocates also correctly point out that the thousands of pages of regulations making up the agreements should hardly be considered examples of genuine free trade.
So-called “security,” the other big integration selling point, is featured prominently in the document as well. “A stronger continental ‘security perimeter’ can strengthen economic performance,“ the cable states. “It could also facilitate future steps toward trilateral economic integration, such as a common external tariff or a customs union.”
And law enforcement “cooperation” is good too, the embassy and the U.S. ambassador claim matter-of-factly.
“Cooperative measures on the ‘security’ side, a critical focus of current bilateral efforts, can deliver substantial, early, and widespread economic benefits,” the cable alleges, offering no evidence to substantiate the assertions.
“Security and law enforcement within North America have evolved rapidly since 9/11,” it continues. “Collaboration to improve these processes could yield efficiency improvements which would automatically be spread widely across the economy, leading to general gains in trade, productivity, and incomes.”
The Alleged “Consensus”
According to the document, “many” economists agree with the scheme. The cable says they support the principle of “more ambitious integration goals” such as a customs union, a single market, and even a continental currency to replace the dollar. On top of that, they supposedly believe such a union should involve all three major North American countries — the United States, Mexico, and Canada.
The cable cautions, however, that “most” of the economists believe the gradual approach is “most appropriate” — for now, at least. And all of them apparently agree that such an approach “helps pave the way to these goals if and when North Americans choose to pursue them.”
The embassy cable also included a summary of what it calls the “professional consensus” among Canadian economists on various issues related to integration.
“At this time, an ‘incremental’ approach to integration is probably better than a ‘big deal’ approach,” the document states under the “process” subheading, supposedly referring to the economists’ opinions. “However, governments should focus on choosing their objectives, and not on choosing a process.”
Next in the cable is the question of “border vs. perimeter,” as the formerly secret document puts it. “Even with zero tariffs, our land borders have strong commercial effects,” the embassy said. However, “some” of the effects — such as law enforcement and “data gathering” — are described as “positive.”
“Canada and the United States already share a security perimeter to some degree; it is just a question of how strong we want to make it,” the 2005 document notes. Apparently Canadians’ main reason for seeking a perimeter approach to security and borders, as opposed to a border between the two nations, is to avoid the “risk” that “discretionary” U.S. decisions to stop terror or disease might impede commerce. And evidently, the nations’ rulers did decide to make the perimeter stronger.
As The New American reported in February, U.S. President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper met in Washington, D.C., to hammer out a deal on solidifying the common “perimeter” around the two countries. Also part of the agreement, which conspicuously bypassed both countries’ legislatures, was a diminished role for the nations’ shared border. The development of a biometric system to track North Americans was agreed to as well, as were numerous other controversial measures.
In terms of labor markets, the so-called “consensus” among the unidentified Canadian economists is also — surprise! — the pursuit of even more integration. “Many Canadian economists point to labor markets — both within and among countries — as the factor market [sic] where more liberalization would deliver the greatest economic benefits for all three countries,” the document states.
Next, the cable release by WikiLeaks highlights another startling proposition about how to achieve an end-run around the Canadian Constitution. “Inter-provincial differences [in regulation] are important here, since Canada's federal government does not have the benefit of a U.S.-style ‘interstate commerce’ clause,” the document states. “While much of the problem is domestic in nature, an international initiative could help to catalyze change.”
Yes, the U.S. embassy referred to the wildly abused and misapplied “commerce clause” as a “benefit” that Canada lacks. And it actually suggested, hiding behind unnamed “economists,” that the constitutional “problem” could be minimized by foisting an “international initiative” on the Canadian people.
The cable also claims the “economists” support a customs union, a feature developed in the European Union once the integration process was well established. “A common external tariff, or a customs union which eliminated NAFTA's rules of origin (ROO), is economically desirable,” it states.
And finally, the document summarizes the “consensus” on the subject of a currency union. It said the supposed economists were “split” on the issues of returning to fixed exchange rates or even abolishing Canada’s fiat dollar and replacing it with American Federal Reserve fiat currency.
The cable gives the final word on the topic of a currency union to the Canadian central bank boss. He is quoted as saying that "monetary union is an issue that should be considered once we have made more progress towards establishing a single market."
Secrets, Backers
The scheme to merge North America into a political unit with its own legislature and currency is largely the brainchild of the world government-promoting Council on Foreign Relations. But though documents leaked earlier this year revealed that governments were trying to keep the process under wraps, integration is now proceeding out in the open for the most part.
Where the campaign will eventually end remains to be seen. But if North American Union advocates get their way, the U.S. Constitution and its Mexican and Canadian counterparts could soon be rendered irrelevant. After that, plugging the regional units into a global system would be a relatively simple matter, critics and supporters both argue.
Be sure to go to the site to see the article with all the hyperlinked source documents: http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-mainmenu-26/north-america-mainmenu-36/7336-wikileaks-exposes-north-american-integration-plot
This info was provided to me by Stephanie Jasky, www.Fedupusa.com
Some details of the schemes were exposed in a secret 2005 U.S. embassy cable from Ottawa signed by then-Ambassador Paul Cellucci. The document was released by WikiLeaks on April 28. But so far, it has barely attracted any attention in the United States, Canada, or Mexico beyond a few mentions in some liberty-minded Internet forums.
Numerous topics are discussed in the leaked document — borders, currency, labor, regulation, and more. How to push the integration agenda features particularly prominently.
Under the subject line “Placing a new North American Initiative in its economic policy context,” American diplomatic personnel in Canada said they believed an “incremental” path toward North American integration would probably gain the most support from policymakers. Apparently Canadian economists agreed.
The cable also touts the supposed benefits of merging the three countries and even mentions what elements to “stress” in future “efforts to promote further integration.” It lists what it claims is a summary of the “consensus” among Canadian economists about the issues, too.
Merging the United States, Canada, and Mexico
Integration is a little-used term employed mainly by policy wonks. But while it may sound relatively harmless, it generally describes a very serious phenomenon when used in a geopolitical context — the gradual merging of separate countries under a regional authority.
Similar processes are already well underway in Europe, Africa, and South America. And according to critics, the results — essentially abolishing national sovereignty in favor of supranational, unaccountable governance — have been an unmitigated disaster. But the U.S. government doesn’t think so.
In North America, integration has been proceeding rapidly for years. The New American magazine was among the first to report on the efforts to erect what critics have called a “North American Union,” encompassing Canada, the United States, and Mexico. But more recently, the topic has received more attention.
After the creation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) — similar in many ways to the European Common Market that preceded the political union in Europe — the integration scheme has only accelerated. And the bipartisan efforts have been going on for years.
Under President George W. Bush, integration occurred through the little-known “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.” And with the Obama administration, the process, now virtually out in the open, is only accelerating.
Back in 2005, the cable released recently by WikiLeaks explained how it would be done. And looking back, the document was right on the mark.
Moving Forward
The best way forward, according to the cable, is via gradual steps. “An incremental and pragmatic package of tasks for a new North American Initiative (NAI) will likely gain the most support among Canadian policymakers,” the cable states in its summary.
“Our research leads us to conclude that such a package should tackle both ‘security’ and ‘prosperity’ goals,” the document claims, using the two key words that have been emphasized at every step along the way. “This fits the recommendations of Canadian economists who have assessed the options for continental integration.”
Toward the end, the cable offers more advice on how to advance the integration agenda by tailoring the narrative. “When advocating [the North American Initiative to integrate the three countries], it would be better to highlight specific gains to individual firms, industries or travelers, and especially consumers,” the cable states, noting that it’s harder to “estimate the benefits” on a national or continental scale.
Unsubstantiated Claims
In a section headlined “North American Integration: What We Know,” the cable offers nothing but praise for the merging of the continent’s once-sovereign nations that had already been achieved.
“Past integration (not just NAFTA but also many bilateral and unilateral steps) has increased trade, economic growth, and productivity,” it claims, despite the fact that countless economists disagree. Of course, true free-trade advocates also correctly point out that the thousands of pages of regulations making up the agreements should hardly be considered examples of genuine free trade.
So-called “security,” the other big integration selling point, is featured prominently in the document as well. “A stronger continental ‘security perimeter’ can strengthen economic performance,“ the cable states. “It could also facilitate future steps toward trilateral economic integration, such as a common external tariff or a customs union.”
And law enforcement “cooperation” is good too, the embassy and the U.S. ambassador claim matter-of-factly.
“Cooperative measures on the ‘security’ side, a critical focus of current bilateral efforts, can deliver substantial, early, and widespread economic benefits,” the cable alleges, offering no evidence to substantiate the assertions.
“Security and law enforcement within North America have evolved rapidly since 9/11,” it continues. “Collaboration to improve these processes could yield efficiency improvements which would automatically be spread widely across the economy, leading to general gains in trade, productivity, and incomes.”
The Alleged “Consensus”
According to the document, “many” economists agree with the scheme. The cable says they support the principle of “more ambitious integration goals” such as a customs union, a single market, and even a continental currency to replace the dollar. On top of that, they supposedly believe such a union should involve all three major North American countries — the United States, Mexico, and Canada.
The cable cautions, however, that “most” of the economists believe the gradual approach is “most appropriate” — for now, at least. And all of them apparently agree that such an approach “helps pave the way to these goals if and when North Americans choose to pursue them.”
The embassy cable also included a summary of what it calls the “professional consensus” among Canadian economists on various issues related to integration.
“At this time, an ‘incremental’ approach to integration is probably better than a ‘big deal’ approach,” the document states under the “process” subheading, supposedly referring to the economists’ opinions. “However, governments should focus on choosing their objectives, and not on choosing a process.”
Next in the cable is the question of “border vs. perimeter,” as the formerly secret document puts it. “Even with zero tariffs, our land borders have strong commercial effects,” the embassy said. However, “some” of the effects — such as law enforcement and “data gathering” — are described as “positive.”
“Canada and the United States already share a security perimeter to some degree; it is just a question of how strong we want to make it,” the 2005 document notes. Apparently Canadians’ main reason for seeking a perimeter approach to security and borders, as opposed to a border between the two nations, is to avoid the “risk” that “discretionary” U.S. decisions to stop terror or disease might impede commerce. And evidently, the nations’ rulers did decide to make the perimeter stronger.
As The New American reported in February, U.S. President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper met in Washington, D.C., to hammer out a deal on solidifying the common “perimeter” around the two countries. Also part of the agreement, which conspicuously bypassed both countries’ legislatures, was a diminished role for the nations’ shared border. The development of a biometric system to track North Americans was agreed to as well, as were numerous other controversial measures.
In terms of labor markets, the so-called “consensus” among the unidentified Canadian economists is also — surprise! — the pursuit of even more integration. “Many Canadian economists point to labor markets — both within and among countries — as the factor market [sic] where more liberalization would deliver the greatest economic benefits for all three countries,” the document states.
Next, the cable release by WikiLeaks highlights another startling proposition about how to achieve an end-run around the Canadian Constitution. “Inter-provincial differences [in regulation] are important here, since Canada's federal government does not have the benefit of a U.S.-style ‘interstate commerce’ clause,” the document states. “While much of the problem is domestic in nature, an international initiative could help to catalyze change.”
Yes, the U.S. embassy referred to the wildly abused and misapplied “commerce clause” as a “benefit” that Canada lacks. And it actually suggested, hiding behind unnamed “economists,” that the constitutional “problem” could be minimized by foisting an “international initiative” on the Canadian people.
The cable also claims the “economists” support a customs union, a feature developed in the European Union once the integration process was well established. “A common external tariff, or a customs union which eliminated NAFTA's rules of origin (ROO), is economically desirable,” it states.
And finally, the document summarizes the “consensus” on the subject of a currency union. It said the supposed economists were “split” on the issues of returning to fixed exchange rates or even abolishing Canada’s fiat dollar and replacing it with American Federal Reserve fiat currency.
The cable gives the final word on the topic of a currency union to the Canadian central bank boss. He is quoted as saying that "monetary union is an issue that should be considered once we have made more progress towards establishing a single market."
Secrets, Backers
The scheme to merge North America into a political unit with its own legislature and currency is largely the brainchild of the world government-promoting Council on Foreign Relations. But though documents leaked earlier this year revealed that governments were trying to keep the process under wraps, integration is now proceeding out in the open for the most part.
Where the campaign will eventually end remains to be seen. But if North American Union advocates get their way, the U.S. Constitution and its Mexican and Canadian counterparts could soon be rendered irrelevant. After that, plugging the regional units into a global system would be a relatively simple matter, critics and supporters both argue.
Be sure to go to the site to see the article with all the hyperlinked source documents: http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-mainmenu-26/north-america-mainmenu-36/7336-wikileaks-exposes-north-american-integration-plot
This info was provided to me by Stephanie Jasky, www.Fedupusa.com
Saturday, April 30, 2011
IS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IMPLODING FROM WITHIN?
What is the Republican Party in 2011? Who is in it and what does it represent anymore? Who CLAIM to be Conservatives? I sure as hell don't know, which explains why I've been an Independent voter since Bob Dole ran for president against the rapist Bill Clinton in '94. This is how it all boils down and why Kenyan-born Muslim Barack Hussein Obama will win a second term unless YOU PEOPLE get your collective head out of your ass. Please, allow yours truly:
• Bill O'Reilly hates Rush Limbaugh.
• Karl Rove, George H.W. and Barbara Bush hate 2012 President-elect Sarah Palin.
• Ann Coulter hates Birthers, most of whom hail from the right.
• Meghan McCain hates any Republican over fifty who does not support the wanton slaughtering of defenseless babies in the womb. I guess this includes her decidedly progressive father who hates George W. Bush.
• Charles Krauthammer hates Donald Trump and Christine O'Donnell.
• Donald Trump hates Republicans, Conservatives and the Tea Party.
• Bill Krystol hates Glenn Beck.
• Mike Huckabee hates Mormons, especially Mitt Romney.
• Establishment, country club, elitist progressives from the Republican Party hate ALL true Conservative women running for any office.
• Lindsey Graham also hates women, but for an entirely different reason.
• George H.W. Bush hated Ronaldus Magnus Reaganus, which explains why he tried to have him killed.
• Ron Paul hates RINOs...who doesn't?
• Colin Powell hates the G.O.P. and will support any candidate who is black, even if it were the Prince of Darkness himself, Satan. Oh wait, he already did in 2008. My bad...carry on.
• Dana Perrino hates Michele Bachmann and any of those confused hicks representing the Tea Party.
• Susan Collins loves Olympia Snowe and BOTH hate Conservatism.
• Scott Brown once heard of a Conservative in Massachusetts, but immediately discovered that it was an ancient legend.
• Charlie Christ hates Marco Rubio, who also happens to hate a Conservative solution to illegal aliens.
• The Tea Party hates cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid or unemployment compensation. "Cut theirs, not mine." According to recent polls reacting to Paul Ryan's proposed budget, this makes the Tea Party a gaggle of hypocrites...if you believe the polls.
• Laura Ingraham hates Arlen Specter, who jumped ship because "I didn't leave the Republican Party - the Republican Party left me."
• Mitt Romney hates the U.S. Constitution, but loves waffles.
• Jeb Bush hates American sovereignty and freedom.
• Mitch McConnell hates anyone taking away his pork barrel projects for his own constituency and will always vote against spending cuts.
• John Boehner hates Paul Ryan's budget plan.
• Nobody liked Gerald Ford.
• No Republican today has EVER heard of Calvin Coolidge or how he managed to solve the Even Greater Depression of 1921. They don't even want to know about it. Get lost.
• Michael Savage hates 'em all.
Do you see what we're faced with? You people are all over the damn place with no foundation in principles, values or vision. The way I see it, the ONLY politicians or players out there who represent TRUE Conservative ideals are:
• 2012 President-elect Sarah Palin
• Congressman Allen West
• Congresswoman Michele Bachmann
• Senator Jim DeMint
• Governor Chris Christie
• Congressman Mike Pence
• Governor Mitch Daniels
• Congressman Jason Chaffetz
• Congressman Darrell Issa
• Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas
Now, you go back to your gray and meaningless lives and think about whether you're a Republican or Conservative, because they are NOT the same. And ya better think twice in calling yourself a Conservative if you support a progressive like Jeb Bush, who is decidedly moderate.
The G.O.P. has become Democrat Light and many are straddling the middle ground. You know the type: "Uh, well, I'm a fiscal conservative and a social liberal." I HATE THESE PEOPLE or anyone who says this. I prefer what John Adams said: "In politics the middle way is none at all."
H/T Sidney Salgado
NOTE: I don't necessarily agree with Mr. Salgado's every statement. But, he has something there to ponder on. We better be careful and come together better sooner than later, otherwise the USA as we know it will be gone.
• Bill O'Reilly hates Rush Limbaugh.
• Karl Rove, George H.W. and Barbara Bush hate 2012 President-elect Sarah Palin.
• Ann Coulter hates Birthers, most of whom hail from the right.
• Meghan McCain hates any Republican over fifty who does not support the wanton slaughtering of defenseless babies in the womb. I guess this includes her decidedly progressive father who hates George W. Bush.
• Charles Krauthammer hates Donald Trump and Christine O'Donnell.
• Donald Trump hates Republicans, Conservatives and the Tea Party.
• Bill Krystol hates Glenn Beck.
• Mike Huckabee hates Mormons, especially Mitt Romney.
• Establishment, country club, elitist progressives from the Republican Party hate ALL true Conservative women running for any office.
• Lindsey Graham also hates women, but for an entirely different reason.
• George H.W. Bush hated Ronaldus Magnus Reaganus, which explains why he tried to have him killed.
• Ron Paul hates RINOs...who doesn't?
• Colin Powell hates the G.O.P. and will support any candidate who is black, even if it were the Prince of Darkness himself, Satan. Oh wait, he already did in 2008. My bad...carry on.
• Dana Perrino hates Michele Bachmann and any of those confused hicks representing the Tea Party.
• Susan Collins loves Olympia Snowe and BOTH hate Conservatism.
• Scott Brown once heard of a Conservative in Massachusetts, but immediately discovered that it was an ancient legend.
• Charlie Christ hates Marco Rubio, who also happens to hate a Conservative solution to illegal aliens.
• The Tea Party hates cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid or unemployment compensation. "Cut theirs, not mine." According to recent polls reacting to Paul Ryan's proposed budget, this makes the Tea Party a gaggle of hypocrites...if you believe the polls.
• Laura Ingraham hates Arlen Specter, who jumped ship because "I didn't leave the Republican Party - the Republican Party left me."
• Mitt Romney hates the U.S. Constitution, but loves waffles.
• Jeb Bush hates American sovereignty and freedom.
• Mitch McConnell hates anyone taking away his pork barrel projects for his own constituency and will always vote against spending cuts.
• John Boehner hates Paul Ryan's budget plan.
• Nobody liked Gerald Ford.
• No Republican today has EVER heard of Calvin Coolidge or how he managed to solve the Even Greater Depression of 1921. They don't even want to know about it. Get lost.
• Michael Savage hates 'em all.
Do you see what we're faced with? You people are all over the damn place with no foundation in principles, values or vision. The way I see it, the ONLY politicians or players out there who represent TRUE Conservative ideals are:
• 2012 President-elect Sarah Palin
• Congressman Allen West
• Congresswoman Michele Bachmann
• Senator Jim DeMint
• Governor Chris Christie
• Congressman Mike Pence
• Governor Mitch Daniels
• Congressman Jason Chaffetz
• Congressman Darrell Issa
• Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas
Now, you go back to your gray and meaningless lives and think about whether you're a Republican or Conservative, because they are NOT the same. And ya better think twice in calling yourself a Conservative if you support a progressive like Jeb Bush, who is decidedly moderate.
The G.O.P. has become Democrat Light and many are straddling the middle ground. You know the type: "Uh, well, I'm a fiscal conservative and a social liberal." I HATE THESE PEOPLE or anyone who says this. I prefer what John Adams said: "In politics the middle way is none at all."
H/T Sidney Salgado
NOTE: I don't necessarily agree with Mr. Salgado's every statement. But, he has something there to ponder on. We better be careful and come together better sooner than later, otherwise the USA as we know it will be gone.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
PROOF THAT BIRTH CERTIFICATE IS A COMPUTER GENERATED FAKE
While most of you or us now want to move on to the critical issues of the day, we should not lose sight of the fact the Obama once again lied to the people and produced a fake birth certificate. If nothing else, we should keep this on the back burner until election time and bring it up again, then. Here is what I received late last night and I wish to share it with the world. If you are so inclined, please pass this on.
I do not understand that Fox News folks like Hannity, O'Reilly, etc are running from this. Who told them to shut up? Not even Beck wants to touch it, let alone the premise that Obama is not eligible because his daddy was Kenyan under British rule. Most of us have studied and gone over this a million times. Why do they think we are stupid and why can't we go after them?
Thanks for letting me rant.
I do not understand that Fox News folks like Hannity, O'Reilly, etc are running from this. Who told them to shut up? Not even Beck wants to touch it, let alone the premise that Obama is not eligible because his daddy was Kenyan under British rule. Most of us have studied and gone over this a million times. Why do they think we are stupid and why can't we go after them?
Thanks for letting me rant.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
STICKY NOTE CAMPAIGN "HOW'S THAT HOPE & CHANGE WORKING OUT FOR YOU?"
Apparently, a protest that started in Georgia and online on a Facebook page is now going national. I can definitely get behind this. Whoever came up with this has the right idea. Let’s put the blame where it goes. Our high prices are not because of ‘big oil,’ nor is it because of demand (demand for everything has been falling for 3 years), it is due to one thing and one thing only: This Administration and Congress allowing the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy of devaluation of our currency.
The bailouts, the games, the welfare for bankers and Wall Street, the ‘quantitative easing’ all must END! If it does not, Obama and his minions and all of Congress who have refused to stand up against this destructive monetary policy must be driven from office.
Help educate others about whose fault all this is. When it comes right down to it, Obama has the power himself to stop the Federal Reserve, but neither he nor anyone in Congress has done one thing to stop what is happening to our dollar. MAKE THEM LISTEN! Leave a sticky note! Leave them everywhere you see high prices!
h/t fedupusa
h/t fedupusa
Monday, April 18, 2011
AMERICAN (UN)CIVILITY ON DISPLAY - VIEWER DISCRETION
Doesn't it seem like ever since Obama touted his civility speech the left is going totally bunkers. I mean this is really so unamerican. Please do not watch if you are sensitive.
REAL AMERICANS VS CONGRESSMEN AND UNION LEADER ON HANNITY
I didn't know this program was going to air last night on Hannity but was lucky enough to tune in by chance. Hannity had Frank Luntz for an entire hour with his group of Americans, both Dems and Republicans to face Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor, a large group of freshmen congressmen and a Union Leader.
It was a very interesting program and my conclusion is that there is hope, only because we are Americans.
It was a very interesting program and my conclusion is that there is hope, only because we are Americans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)